Thinking about introducing the phrase 'second-classedness' in my book project to capture the idea that some systems (Hellenistic) emphasize the degree of inequality in their armies while other systems (Roman) aggressive de-emphasize it.
Thoughts? Too informal a term?
Thoughts? Too informal a term?
Comments
damn. historians gotta be more creative than scifi writers, especially if they're tryna be truthful
Cf. "Conduct that is criminal" vs. "Conduct that is classed as criminal."
Thus 'classedness' as a focus not on the reality of the class system, but its perception.
And understandably grumpy about it!
2. second-classedness is ... suboptimal;
3. perhaps: "for an Egyptian soldier, the Ptolemaic system amplified his second-class position, while the Roman system did not."
On the other hand, it sounds awful.
On the foot, "subalternity" sounds just as bad.
On the last foot, I can't think of pithy alternatives.
but I am also not an academic
It's not that your statement doesn't work but I feel this is even more clear without introducing an unnecessary word.
A poor Greek in Alexandria is still 'first class' in a way that a rich Egyptian is not.